Menu

This is hardly a theological book as most will know. However it a thought provoking classic that makes for good roundtable talks so hence why it is reviewed here. This is a political satire of the highest tier (pun intended for those who speak German). The flow of the book is very fast paced and you’ll blow through the book in no-time. Despite being all animals the characters becoming engaging and it is a fun story.

The basic plot is that animals treated poorly on a farm revolt against their human overlords. The pig Napoleon assumes leadership and institutes a new rule called animalism. The leadership gets corrupted over time and eventually Napoleon becomes the dictatorial ruler over the farm and is not much different from the previous human rulers.

This bought ought to be a mandatory book not just in literature but also in politics class. George problematizes revolutionary forms of government and have good thoughts about power and it’s tendency to corrupt. Animal Farm is a spot on satire of the Soviet Union – particularly under Stalin – but it’s so much more than that. As any good satire it stays relevant and applicable in many other conditions. Regardless of where you are on the political scale read this book and be challenged by it.

Freedom must always be highly valued and not be taken for granted. 10/10

I have been waiting for this book to come out for at least a year now, having sat in the author’s New Testament lectures in theological college, and I was not disappointed. The book sets out to answer the question “how did God experience human sexuality?” With immensely popular books such as Dan Brown’s ‘The Da Vinci code’ propagating the myth that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene, the responses of orthodox Christians could often lead one to think that Jesus did not experience any form of sexuality whatsoever. Angel seeks to dispel this notion by way of examination of passages from the Gospel of John. However, the tendency of modern culture could lead someone to grab the idea that Jesus experienced sexuality and run with it in licentiousness, so Angel is careful to demonstrate just how Jesus experienced sexuality. He recognises that the idea of God experiencing human sexuality may prove controversial or even uncomfortable for some, but posits that the truth of the incarnation is too precious to allow our own presuppositions to dictate what Jesus could and could not have experienced.

The first chapter, entitled ‘Asking the question’, sets the scene from the woman at the well in John 4. After making much of the unasked question on the mind of the disciples in John 4:27, which the author translates “What are you after?”, he comments that, “it becomes very difficult to believe that John could possibly have described Jesus as the Word become flesh without realising that others would naturally hear this in terms of Jesus’ physicality and sexuality.” This sets the tone for the rest of the book; here we have the assertion that Jesus did experience human sexuality, the rest of the book explores how that worked out in practice. There is an extended discussion of the historical context of Graeco-Roman baths, with which the Apostle John would have been familiar, in order to build up a picture of the kind of physicality and sexuality John’s readers would have assumed was being evoked. While the length of this discussion was perhaps unnecessary, it was helpful in terms of context.

Chapter two, ‘Word became flesh’, is a discussion primarily of the Christology behind the author’s thesis; “if we are to understand how John pictures Jesus’ sexuality, we need to see it as part of his wider portrait of Jesus: God made human, word made flesh.” Angel begins with a discussion of what it meant for Jesus to be described as the Word, and shows that in the context of Ancient Near Eastern wisdom literature, this would have included a sexual component. The tracing of these ancient perspectives on wisdom and the following discussion of the relationship between the Father and the Son is meticulous and extensive. However, if the author had not included the above quote about needing to understand the wider Christology, one would be left to wonder what relevance this had to the topic at hand. After this discussion of the deity of Christ, there is discussion of His humanity. Here we have the assertion that “John presents Jesus as having a normal human body with normal human needs”, and this is again meticulously traced and accounted-for. Finally there is a discussion of the implications of ‘the Word became flesh’, in John 1:14. This is set in the context of John 1:13, wherein sarx (flesh) appears to be referring to sexual desire (and reference is made to interpreters from church history, such as Calvin, to substantiate this). The chapter rises to a climax in discussing the remainder of 1:14 and the glory of God; “Given the connotations of sarx in this context, making Jesus the place where people see God’s glory suggests that the glory of God is visible in the way Jesus lives out his sexuality – as part of his life and works more generally.” There is an acknowledgement that this would have been controversial to any Second Temple Jewish readers, who sought to keep the Temple free from sexual defilement, with a discussion of the role of sex and wisdom in Second Temple literature. This is an incredibly dense chapter, with much reference made to ancient literature and writers. However, the light it sheds on the incarnation and glory of God make it worth the read.

The third chapter, ‘A Samaritan bride and her Jewish groom’, expands greatly on the discussion of the woman at the well from John 4. This chapter was the highlight of the book for me, as it sought to demonstrate just how Jesus glorified God in the exercise (or non-exercise) of his sexuality. We are told that “John uses a standard plot which was familiar to ancient Jewish audiences, namely ‘guy meets girl at well and they get married’, to tell the story of the God who woos humanity back into relationship with him.” The author is (simplistically) describing a Betrothal Narrative, perhaps the purest form of which in Scripture can be found in the story of Issac and Rebekah. The chapter opens by establishing Jesus as the Bridegroom, from the wedding at Cana in John 2, and John the Baptist’s exaltation of Christ in John 3. In this context of a Bridegroom and a betrothal narrative, there is exploration of “the divine marriage of God and the people he calls into relationship with himself.” There is extended exploration of the narrative of John 4, detailing how everyone involved (namely the woman and the disciples) appear to have interpreted Jesus as having sexual motives (“the disciples read Jesus as having the same sexual desires as the next man”), whereas Jesus clearly had salvific motives. These salvific motives become important when we see how broken the Samaritan woman was as a result of her sexual history. Angel posits that it would have been easy for Jesus to take advantage of the woman, as one would expect from a Graeco-Roman hero or god. However, “he chooses not to, and acts in a way that avoids either of them doing anything they could (or should) regret. He puts her long-term spiritual need before any short-term physical desire he might have.” This, asserts Angel, is how Jesus displayed the glory of God in his sexuality: “Jesus preferred to bring healing to the sexual life of another rather than seeking pleasure for himself in fulfilment of his own desires.” Angel is adamant that the self-control Jesus exercised over his sexuality in no way diminishes that sexuality. Rather, it shows the way of true sexuality.

Chapter four, ‘Male intimacy’, explores Jesus’ relationship with his disciples, especially John, the beloved disciple. There is much discussion of the position of the beloved disciple at the Last Supper, laying in the breast/lap (kolpos) of Christ; “this disciple is portrayed in the strongest possible terms as being intimate with Jesus.” This is set within the context of the discussion of the relations between Father and Son seen in Chapter 1, and the assertion made here is that the beloved disciple shows us that humanity is invited to share the kind of intimacy seen between the Father and the Son. Following this is a lengthy discussion setting the Supper in the context of an ancient Greek symposium. While it is interesting to read that Greek teachers would have their favourite pupils (Socrates and Plato being a prime example), it was occasionally difficult to see the direct relevance of this discussion to the matter at hand, other than to note that Greek teachers had sex with their favourite pupils, and Jesus didn’t have sex with John the beloved. Angel acknowledges that the relationship between Jesus and John the beloved has often been misconstrued as homosexual, and the Greek context may not help in that matter. Angel laments that our modern culture has lost any idea of this kind of close intimacy shared between two men without assuming there must be some sexual component. The standout quote of the chapter was, “This love which the Father and the Son share is too good not to talk about it. Arguably the whole Gospel is about this love. If the intimacy of passionate sexuality is the only image which gives adequate expression to it depths (even if this love does not express itself sexually), then John seems to have been willing to take the risk of disapproval in order to tell the world about it.” I greatly appreciated this conclusion, even if I didn’t always follow along with how the author got there.

The fifth (and final full) chapter, entitled ‘Peter, Mary and the woman caught in adultery’, explores mainly the ways in which Jesus did not exercise his sexuality, by examining the stories of Peter, Mary Magdalene, Mary of Bethany, and the woman caught in adultery. These appear to have been chosen mainly due to the fact that there has been rife speculation throughout the centuries as to the nature of their relationship with Christ. I appreciated how adamant Angel was that there is no textual support for a relationship between Jesus and Mary Magdalene. However, the chapter continues; “While there may be nothing in John to suggest there was ever anything between Jesus and Mary Magdalene, the same cannot be said for Jesus and Mary of Bethany.” Angel then goes on to detail some of the sexual tension (or “frisson”, to use his term) he sees between Jesus and Mary of Bethany, especially in the anointing of Jesus’ feet and the scene at Lazarus’ tomb. This was certainly an interesting proposition, and put a new spin on a familiar story. Following this is a discussion of Jesus’ relationship with Peter, and the latter’s apparent envy of the beloved disciple. While this is all solid material, it’s unclear why it wasn’t dealt with in chapter four. Finally the chapter discuss the notorious story of the woman caught in adultery. While brief mention is made of the arguments surrounding the canonicity of this story, these arguments are not why Angel has included it. While the story does not address Jesus’ sexuality directly, Angel posits that it tells us rather a lit about Jesus’ attitudes towards sexuality, namely that Jesus offers a second chance to those who have made mistakes in their sex lives, but he expects obedience as a result; “Jesus may not condemn her but he certainly instructs her to live life in obedience to his commands.” All-in-all this was an enjoyable chapter, but it felt a bit more disjointed than the others.

The sixth chapter, ‘Intimate Jesus’, serves as a helpful conclusion to the whole work. The importance of recognising how Jesus exercised his sexuality, according to Angel, is thus;

“Those of us for whom questions about faith, sex and sexuality arise from our experience can heave a sigh of relief: the God whose commands we struggle with, and to whom we pray in and about our difficulties, understands sexual desire from experience. He is not only ‘gentle and humble in heart’ as he disciples us, but he has more than a rough idea of what we are going through.”

I thoroughly enjoyed reading this work. It demonstrates both an orthodox understanding of sexuality and a commitment to the biblical text under consideration. Angel refuses to countenance and argument if there is no textual warrant for it. However, he is unafraid to explore uncomfortable or controversial avenues and conclusions if that’s where he feels the text is leading. This is a book for anyone who has ever wondered how their sexuality fits into their spirituality.

Well here it is! The first book review of the summer of 2017! With a book like this, I can honestly say that my summer is off to a great start! The Creedal Imperative, written by Dr. Trueman was published in 2012 by Crossway books, and running just short of 200 pages, is a very well written tour of and apologetic for the use of creeds and confessions within the Church down the centuries to the modern day. As the holder of the Paul Woolley Chaired professor of Church History at Westminster Theological Seminary, he seems uniquely situated to comment on this topic and his insights are in fact, helpful.

The book contains six chapters and an appendix on precisely how creeds have come about in the Church, how they are not just historical but biblical and necessary to the life of the Christian church, and ultimately useful as a tool to promote theological orthodoxy and sound doxology. In other words, to promote right belief in God, and right praise of who God is. This insightful piece of wisdom noted in the text is who God has revealed Himself to be, or how we view how God has revealed Himself will determine how we worship Him. This theme remains constant throughout the entirety of the text. It is also of note to define what exactly is a creed or a confession, and Dr. Trueman furnishes us with the following definition, “Creeds and Confessions are human attempts to summarize the basic elements of the Christian faith.”[1]

Within the pages of the book, one is also painfully aware, as it makes up the first chapter of the text, that the arguments against the use of historical creeds and confessions are incapable of standing the attack Trueman brings to bear on them. Dr. Trueman goes so far as to argue that creeds and confessions are foundationally Biblical[2] and that to not be subject to one is to be slave to ones own interpretation. An example used within the text is that the church who has no confession or creed, but holds to a “no creed but the Bible” stance is enslaved to the particular preacher’s interpretation of that morning text. Ultimately, Trueman argues, and I think rightly, that everyone is confessional, but the difference is between a confession that is written down and one that is not. Those who have a written confession are more able to keep their ministers and elders in check by appealing to the confessions as Biblical summaries and expositions within that church. The church that does not have a creed/confession is bound to what the preacher speaks on that morning and if their opinion changes from one week to the next, the congregation is along for the ride. In this way, Trueman argues, confessions are quite useful in acting as a check on individualistic interpretations and more.

If you are looking for a good book summarizing the need for creeds and confessions, of even simply want to know what all the hubbub has been about lately with a growing return and movement toward “” or “Reformed theology” I heartily recommend Dr. Trueman’s book to you as a good resource to and starting point to work from. Additionally, Dr. Trueman includes a “For Further Reading” section in the back. Take it from someone who has taken his classes, this has always been one of my favorite parts of his syllabi and books. You can find the book here at the Westminster book store. If you can’t afford the book right now, feel free to peruse my own small essay on the subject, though I confess openly that it pales in comparison in both accuracy and depth to Dr. Trueman’s great work on creeds and confessions and why the Church ought to make them an imperative.

This semester, as jam packed as I was with my schedule, I tried to carve out a little bit of time for some personal reading. As St. Patrick’ day rolled around, I told my annual joke, reminding my friends that St. Patrick was not an Irishman…pointing out that he was in fact, a Roman, and therefore of an Italian ethnicity. Beyond this I did not know a great deal about Patrick as a person. This troubled me a little bit and decided to pick up something on the topic from my local library[1]. I settled on “St. Patrick of Ireland” by Philip Freeman. This short book runs 193 pages and is a wealth of information and primary source material[2]. Simon & Schuster Inc. published the book in 2004.[3]

The problem facing any historian and biographer regarding St. Patrick and pre-medieval Ireland is the fact that information is scarce, and on top of the information are legends, myths, and changes to historical accounts by later scribes to make the accounts seem larger than life. This is a difficulty that Philip Freeman wrestles with in this particular book. Dr. Freeman is currently the chair for the classical department at Luther College, gaining his doctorate from Harvard University.[4] Dr. Freeman does very good work in not only giving us the fact we know about the life of St. Patrick, but he fills in the gaps of time with what Patrick might have or was likely to experience as a Roman boy of a minor aristocrat, a slave in Ireland, to a returning young man to Roman Britain, and so on.

As a reader, there sometimes seemed to be bits and chunks of information used to fill those gaps that edged closer to educated guesses, based on information we have from the time around the life of Patrick. The author, in the introduction, confesses that “The details that Patrick gives us of his life are few and often tantalizingly vague…”[5] however the author goes onto say that “Taken together with his letters, these sources[6] tell the story of an extraordinary man living in a tumultuous age.”[7] Finally, there is certainly a moving away from the religious history and an attempt to get at the actual life of Patrick beyond all the possible additions, exaggerations and fabrications that have crept in over the centuries.

In addition to the life of St. Patrick, Dr. Freeman also covers background information of the Ireland from the early 2nd century B.C. to the first two centuries after Patrick, bringing to bear all sorts of different accounts, from Greeks and Romans to archaeological evidence from the ancient Mediterranean, Britain and Ireland itself. Dr. Freeman covers succinctly the length and breadth of culture, politics, religion, history, and more in this book. In order to do this however, toward the middle of the book, the author momentarily breaks from the narrative of St. Patrick that we have been tracking with and delves into these subjects to give the reader a broader understanding of early Irish culture and obstacles that Patrick would have encountered.

As a point of interest, shortly before coming to seminary I read another book about the Irish by Thomas Cahill called, “How the Irish Saved Civilization”[8] In that book, Mr. Cahill argues that if it were not for the Irish a great deal knowledge and culture would have been lost, and that it was in fact Irish Christianity that saved the day by planting monasteries and copying vast amounts of text to be reintroduced to the continent of Europe at the close of the dark ages.[9] Whether purposefully or indirectly or by mere happenstance, Dr. Freeman attempts to refute this idea. Dr. Freeman states that,

“The Irish did not save civilization-it had never been lost. The vibrant monasteries and learned nobility of western Europe, not to mention the entire eastern Roman Empire, would have laughed at the notion that the Irish were rescuing them from barbarism.”[10]

Dr. Freeman goes on to note that the Irish were most likely respected for their strict monastic adherence and scholarship[11] but beyond this, the Irish were not the saviors Thomas Cahill makes them out to be, at least this is the inevitable conclusion a reader familiar with both of these works must draw.

In conclusion I would say that this book is certainly worth the read and it is quite entertaining and informative. However, as I would recommend with any work that has at its core the intention to inform the, look to additional sources and take the time to read other books and compare the information received. Be Bereans about it! I for one will certainly be reading more of Dr. Freeman’s books! Check them out at your local library!

[1] Shameless plug, use your local library! It is totally worth using to find little gem’s like this one.

[2] The Author considers the two works considered to have been written by St. Patrick in the rear of the book, “Confessions” and “Letter to the Soldiers of Coroticus”

Spoilers: If you have yet to see the film, I would recommend doing so first and then coming back to read this review.

When I head that my seminary was going to be hosting a screening of the new film “Silence” (based on the book by Shusaku Endo) direct by Martin Scorsese I was quite excited that I was finally going to be able to see what everyone was talking about. The idea of seeing the movie brought up within me a mixed bag of emotions and feelings, from who the director was to the subject matter of persecution of Catholic believers. The movie was bound to be an emotionally charged one and to that end, it certainly accomplished its mission.

As the movie opens one is left wondering what is going to happen, where as other films open with a score of some sort or some type of action, the move opens with none of that, just silence. Then you hear crickets and then, you begin to see persecution of Jesuit priests, boiling water from hot spring being slowly dripped onto their skin. This sets the tone for the beginning of the movie, but I was certainly surprised that this is not where the movie sits. It is one thing to make a film about Christian persecution, it is another to provoke conversations and deep thought from almost every moment and I think this is where Scorsese really accomplishes his feat of art.

In a great many movies they are meant to be viewed from the perspective of a spectator. In “Silence” you are forced to connect with the people on screen. The way this is most evident on the front end is what would you do? I’m sure many of us are willing to die for things we believe in. You would die before you give up your treasured beliefs. But what about others? Would you allow them die for what you believe to be true? Do not be too quick to answer. I would recommend that you think on it, wrestle with it, assess what you hold to be true and how it is important and is it enough to make the decision for you.

On a deeper lever though, we identify on a spiritual level. In the character of Kichijiro, we see a man who is continually turning away from God and apostatizing, and yet theologically is this not what we do when we sin against our Lord? This is the thing I was forced to deal with personally. How many times had I purposefully acted against the command of my God? How many times do I sin each day? And yet, this is part of the miracle of God’s grace. By the third time this happened in the film and Father Rodrigues is getting quite tired of giving Kichijiro absolution for his continued failure of will to withstand persecution Matthew 18:22 came into my head. How many times does one forgive this one who continues to apostatize the faith? How many times a day am I forgiven for my own sins. [1]

This film truly does give one pause and force one to think deeply of the themes within. I had the privilege of not only watching the movie for free at my seminary but to be able to stay afterward for a post-movie discussion with Makoto Fujimura. He is the author of “Silence and Beauty: Hidden Faith Born of Suffering” and advised on the production. His incites into the making of the move and the themes within were indeed eye-opening. Though the movie most definitely has a Roman Catholic bent (the main characters are Jesuit priests), the theme of God’s grace within this film and the book by Endo feature so strongly that he had at points been accused of holding a theology that was more Protestant than Catholic. Endo, himself a Catholic, responded to such things with a simple “Thank You”.[2] It is again, on this very note, that the film speaks to the necessity for conversation. Why do we believe what we believe? What separates us doctrinally? How do we better understand the gospel, which so many have died for within the particular frame of the Japanese Christians up close, but more widely all Christian martyrs in the history?

At one point in the film Fr. Rodrigues, under an interrogation of sorts quotes the Church Father Tertullian, “The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church”. This is a concept that Christians down the ages have assented to and held to, but to repeat what was said above here, how do we wrestle with such ideas and experiences on a personal, intimate, on the ground level. We have been sheltered in the west from persecution like the kind we see in this film, and I think that it behooves Christians to come to terms and discuss such things.

Ultimately, I have a high opinion of this film and I think it is incredibly useful as a discussion tool. I also think that it is one of those unique movies that you can watch multiple times and pick up on new things each time to delve into and think on. A great film and great theme’s with-in for the viewer to wrestle with, what more can the viewer ask for?

Post-Script

A little bit about me, I am a Reformed Christian studying at Westminster Theological Seminary. While there is much that, as a Reformed Christian, that I disagree with, I think that there is a great deal of places where the two parties can come together and discuss or even discuss within their own specific groups. It is also important to note that there will be ideas within the movie that one disagrees with, that is a good thing. It means you are thinking critically of the subject matter and reckoning with it. This movie, and I would venture to say the book before it is a work of cinema, was and is deep seated with culture and should be treated as such. The movie gets people thinking and talking and that is an accomplishment in my book.

[1] I also think that this is a tie in to the gospel. Christ did not die to give me grace for my particular sin(s), He died to give me grace for my sin. As a human being I am one who is sinful to the core, and yet by the indwelling of Christ and the quickening of my soul by the Holy Spirit, I am made into a new creation.

[2] I am not speaking of my own opinion of Catholicism or Protestantism here, commenting on what Endo was himself accused of and how he responded.

The revival and resurgence of Calvinism within evangelical christianity is a amazing thing. A shallow and superficial evangelicalism have come to embrace solid biblical theology and the fact that theology matters. Much ink has been spilled on this subject both lauding the resurgence and also pointing out its problematic sides. Greg Dutcher postulates that there is a danger that we Calvinist ourself can run the risk of killing Calvinism.

In eight chapters he take on the subject:
1. By Loving Calvinism as an End in Itself
2. By Becoming a Theologian Instead of a Disciple
3. By Loving God’s Sovereignty More Than God Himself
4. By Losing an Urgency in Evangelism
5. By Learning Only from Other Calvinist
6. By Tidying Up the Bible’s “Loose Ends”
7. By Being an Arrogant Know-It-All
8. By Scoffing at the Hang-ups Others Have with Calvinism

Greg writes in a warm and down to earth way and builds his arguments in both biblical and historical ways. Greg seem to have a heart for theology and life being in harmony and that bleeds into his writing. This little book is a labour of love Greg has made for his fellow Calvinist which also is noticeable when you read it. It’s not just tender though, the warnings he give are a real and present danger. Each chapter ends with a written prayer related to the subject he just dealt with. So true to its intent the book is not merely head knowledge but also practical. I recommend the book to any Calvinist, particularly those of us who love filling our heads with knowledge from our huge stacks of books. The book deserves a resounding 10/10.

This book is the transcription of three sermons by John Piper on sanctification. It is abundantly made clear is that sanctification is the result of justification. In the preface one of Pipers quotes is highlighted to point to this:

“The only sin we can defeat is a forgiven sin”

In this there sermons Piper delivers four acronyms that are worthwhile sharing.

APTAT – For the everyday challenges
Acknowledge that apart from Christ you can’t do anything of eternal value
Pray to God for help for loving others and that grace may reign in me
Trust in the promises of God
Act in obedience to God’s word
Thank God for whatever good may have come through me

IOUS – For reading the Bible
Incline, my soul needs a inclination towards God and his Word
Open, pray for a open heart
Unite, unite my fragmented heart
Satisfy, I want to be satisfied by God

AIMS – For Christ-consciousness throughout the day
Alive – Jesus is alive!
In – Jesus is in me!
Mighty – Jesus is mighty!
Satisfying – Jesus is satisfying!

These sermons are absolutely good, sound and biblical. The acronyms are helpful, though the two middle ones sound more like something from a military command center than something to memorize. Piper is to be lauded for in his ministry reminding God’s people of the satisfaction in God and this runs through these sermons. But the question is what the purpose of this book is. It’s three sermons stitched together with only being the same theme. This could have been done better. The sermons could have been used as a source material for a short book on sanctification. The material is good but the execution is lacking.

Therefore i give it 6/10. The book is free for download at Desiring God. Despite the low grade i recommend it if you have the time since the content is good.

I read this book as part of the Challies reading challenge for 2017. Go search for it if you’re unaware of it, it’s a great thing for book lovers. Quo Vadis is historical fiction at its best. This is a thrilling historical novel with strong biblical strokes.

It takes place in Rome during the 60 A.D. The main character is Vinicius, a young Roman patrician who falls in love with the Christian girl Lygia. When you know whats gonna happen historically the question is whats gonna happen to the main characters. Vinicius is drawn to the Christian faith because of Lygia and will eventually become Christian. But he will still struggle with his earlier life as Roman patrician. Emperor Nero is a autocratic demagog that goes deeper and deeper into madness. These character arcs is one of the greatest strengths of this book.

We get to see different struggles and tensions within the church but also we get to see the gospel proclaimed in ancient Rome. Vinicius eventually get to meet both Peter and Paul. Their lines are in big parts based on what they say in the Bible in the gospels and letters. For example as Paul is taken to be executed he rejoices to have finished his race. Before we get to know the Christians we get to see them from Roman perspective with all the myths and prejudices surrounding the early church. But eventually Vinicius will end upp thinking:

“What kind of God is this, what kind of religion is this, and what kind of people are these?”

Nero -the ruler of the world- tries to annihilate the church. But he dies and the church lives on. This becomes the climax of the book.

“And so Nero passed, as a whirlwind, as a storm, as a fire, as war or death passes; but the church of Jesus Christ rules until now, from that city, every city, and throughout the world, for all eternity.”

When I saw that I had to take Principles of Apologetics this semester and that this book was one of the required books on the list, I decided then and there to try to get a jumpstart on my schoolwork. As any good Seminarian knows, you start the semester two weeks behind and have to try to catch up from there![1] I have a unique privilege here in reading this particular book, as its writer is also my instructor for this class! This book was published in 2013 by Crossway Publishing and is roughly 262 pages in length. The author is Rev. Dr. K. Scott Oliphint, professor of Apologetics and Systematic Theology here at Westminster Theological Seminary. [2]

This is my second time going through this book, as the first time was a miserable failure, as I tried to juggle it with all my other middle of the semester work and could not give it the proper attention it deserved. Being able to have hours at a time to delve into the text this time around has been a privilege and I would recommend the same to you before jumping into it. Though admittedly, I tend to take a bit longer making my way through them.

The work itself is startlingly deep and yet quite applicable to the Christian life. Writing from a Reformed position, Dr. Oliphint gives a breathtaking view of an apologetic method that is both effective and is consistent with the revelation of God. The first apologetics professor at Westminster, Cornelius Van Til, developed the method that came to be known as “Presuppositional apologetics.” This method is, simply put, “is naturally and centrally focused on the reality of God’s revelation in Christ, including, of course, the good news of the gospel.”[3] However, Dr. Oliphint makes a distinction early on, he dislikes the term “Presuppositional” and instead recommends the term “covenantal” as a more consistent, fitting and Biblical term. I am inclined to agree with him on this point.

Reading through this book, Dr. Oliphint is constantly looking back to the Scriptures in order to craft an apologetic method, giving to the reader apologetic principals, and putting into practice an apologetic that is thoroughly consistent with Biblical revelation. Key to this is Joshua’s encounter with the Commander in the army of the Lord (Joshua 5:13-15), Paul’s address on Mar’s Hill (Acts 17:22-31), and several other points within the text of Scripture. Though Dr. Oliphint admits several times, that his book is only a short foray and could not possibly cover all the Scripture that could be applied. To aide in this reality, Dr. Oliphint proposes the Ten Tenets at the start of the book. These ten tenets give a way to asses our apologetic method in a way so as to make sure that it is consistent with what we derive from Scripture. The book is worth the buy just to take a look at these ten short tenets, so the rest of the material, I can assure you, is certainly worth the time it takes to study through it.

In closing, I would say that this book, though incredibly helpful to the believer and helpful in crafting a foundation for a solid apologetic method, is deep and complex at times. My recommendation to anyone who reads this book would be that it is important to stay in Scripture. Keep your Bible close to you as you go through this book. It would also be helpful to have a dictionary handy as well! But all in all this book is a solid read in terms of helping one understand a covenantal apologetic and for pointing them toward additional resources that would be a help in this journey. Grab a copy and get started!!!

Reformed Library9 membersIt is our belief that every scholar, theologian, and/or pastor needs to interact with a wide variety of reading. Literature (classic and modern), philosophy, non-fiction, sociology, psychology, and of course theology are all important to how we form opinions.
Here is a place to discuss what you're reading no matter what it is. We do ask that people interact charitably with the material you read and the ideas of others in the group.